Forum:Starcraft 2 Arcade Map Wiki
Hello, I play starcraft2 mainly arcade games, I also made a map and working on other maps. I have looked at this wiki and would like to contribute and make some wiki pages for some of the most popular arcade games. The selection criteria for arcade maps to have an article is outdated, blizzard no longer focus on arcade so the best maps are not "notable" by your standards. I propose a revision of these standards to include some more of the most popular, most number of ratings and high ratings games, this will greater reflect the diversity of the starcraft 2 arcade and provide high quality wiki articles for players to use as the rule book and stat guide for these arcade games. Jesideaxis (talk) 13:08, January 25, 2017 (UTC) Notoriety-0.jpg|Top Played, Top ranked, Most Reviewed :Arcade is a can of worms where, if I had my way, we probably would have spun it off into its own wiki a long time ago. The way I always viewed this wiki is "what you get in the box" just buying StarCraft and StarCraft products if you somehow never interacted with the community at large, so lore and basic units and strategy. Esports and tactics you go to Liquipedia. To get detailed into arcade usually people spun off into their own wikis. :While we may want to look at what defines "notable" (Desert Strike has been top since WoL), I'm hesitant to really open up the floodgates for several reasons: :1. As you've shown, there's can be sixty different variations of a popular map (Parasite, P A R A S I T E, Parasite by Smith). One hard line policy I like is the "fan works get exactly one article" so as to not flood the wiki with non-official things that aren't really the wiki's focus. This does however mean if you want this wiki to be the main repository for that map it'll be incomplete. :2. Usually our policy is actually to just discuss the map's history and a basic overview, not go into a lot of detail on strategy and meta. We've been lax about it since we don't get many contributors and as long as it's kept isolated to one article it's been harmless, but if this becomes regular that's something we have to discuss. :3. Keeping up with arcade is a very very active effort, and considering we have maybe five regular editors who already strain to keep up with official releases and don't play all that much arcade (or at least enough to edit them in) we'd need a commitment from people to keep up with what's popular and be on all the time. :4. On that note, we'd have to define what is popular. Something could hit the top of the charts and just immediately fall into obscurity. If we had kept active with it that's be fine, but unless we could go back and see everything that hit the top of the charts we'd have to clearly define what is popular. Again for Nexus Wars or Desert Strike I'm fine with, those are very clearly notable and have always been, but a lot of other maps not so much. :5. We'd also have the issue of maps with a more devout community expanding their articles more then maps that may or may not be more popular. We generally are pretty good about giving equal focus to things here, since we're limited to Blizzard things, but going hyper detailed into one arcade map and having a brief summary of others leaves this wiki feeling incomplete. :6. This also opens the issue of custom campaigns not necessarily on arcade, do we rope them in under this or just stick to things popular on arcade? (Mass Recall being the obvious exception) :Honestly, best solution is probably to make a sister wiki and move the arcade stuff over there, if only because it'd allow mapmakers to expand on their articles more without rubbing shoulders with our policies. Barring that I think I'd be ok with a very minimal reevaluation of our policy, but most certainly we need to keep ourselves limited in what arcade maps we feature. Subsourian (talk) 14:52, January 25, 2017 (UTC) ::Sub's more or less right in his points. I mean, I've nothing against an arcade maps wiki being formed, because outside Liquidpedia, there's at least four StarCraft wikis on wikia (this one, the fanfic one, the Night of the Dead one, and one dedicated to a DotA-esque fan map). Course we're not the people to ask about that. ::Point 4 is a sticker, and part of the reason why the notability exists is to prevent bias on our own part. And if we're being consistent, we'd have to choose how it would apply to fan writings/art/music/videos, etc. So far the policy covers all of those things, hence why we do have some such articles when they meet the criteria.--Hawki (talk) 20:57, January 25, 2017 (UTC) i actually only intended on adding one parasite page but the one i had made was deleted and i didnt understand what happened and i remade it. On that note can i just update the other parasite page then? as that old parasite game is effectively dead, its 4 years old, not active, hardly anyone plays it, this new one is very popular, has an active community who are keen to help create the wiki, it is a high quality map, is the spiritual successor to the old one and is actively being developed as we speak. Thanks for your consideration hawki, i appreciate your time in this matter. Jesideaxis (talk) 02:49, January 26, 2017 (UTC) Im not active enough on this wiki to have an opinion about creating a whole new arcade wiki, but what ever happens, i just want a place like this wiki where high quality arcade maps can have "rul;e book" starat guide for players who love starcraft 2 arcade :) so if i can just make a few pages for games that are 1: very popular, 2. high rated and lots of ratings, 3. active 4. unique using this criteria you might get another 10 pages of arcade maps, im not trying to swamp the wiki with garbage, just think only having maps that blizzard has mentioned misses a large portion of maps that deserve a place at the starcraft table Jesideaxis (talk) 02:50, January 26, 2017 (UTC) :I've no idea why the Parsite (map) even gets an article, but fine, sure, update it. Just keep whatever info you have to the same page, and don't erase the old info.--Hawki (talk) 05:53, January 26, 2017 (UTC)